[governance] comment to subcommitte nov 15

[James Love]

I think it is important to emphasize Adam's point.   jl

On Nov 15, 2005, at 4:35 AM, Adam Peake (ajp at glocom.ac.jp) wrote:

> I read the following text this morning.  I expect there may be  
> disgareements over two parts:
>
> 1. "We would also like to suggest that the UN Secretary General, as  
> part of its open and inclusive process, work with relevant  
> organizations including those from civil society and the Internet  
> technical community in creating the Forum."
>
> I heard some comments against including "Internet technical  
> community" and
>
> 2. "The IETF model is appropriate for dealing with technical  
> standards relating to the Internet, but alone does not provide an  
> suitable model for addressing complex public policy debates which  
> require a discursive deliberative  process rather than the  
> resolution of technical problems. "
>
> This was a reaction to ISOC's presentation made a few minuets   
> before discussion aspects of the forum might which emphasized the  
> Internet technical community.  And did not mention broader civil  
> society.  Saying IETF *alone*  does not provide a suitable model  
> seems to balance the issue in 1.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Adam
>
>
>
> Thank you Mr. Chairman. Good morning.
>
> We were particularly pleased with paragraphs 76 & 77 read by  
> Singapore late yesterday evening about forum functions. We offer  
> thanks to the chair and members of that group.
>
> The original text that was offered for paragraphs 76-80 addresses  
> many of the concerns we have had concerning the Forum. It broadly  
> reflects the intent for the Forum as expressed in the WGIG report  
> and in our previous comments for a Forum that facilitates:
>
> inclusive dialog,
> expert analysis,
> and the monitoring of trends and practice,
>
> with regard to the full range on Internet governance public policy  
> issues. However, we do have a comment about 77c about limiting  
> parallel meetings of the Forum to major UN conferences. We  
> recommend that meetings also be held in parallel to relevant  
> Internet governance organization conferences.
>
> We would also like to suggest that the UN Secretary General, as  
> part of its open and inclusive process, work with relevant  
> organizations including those from civil society and the Internet  
> technical community in creating the Forum. The Forum should be a  
> mutistakeholder entity from creation to operation.
>
> The IETF model is appropriate for dealing with technical standards  
> relating to the internet, but alone does not provide an suitable  
> model for addressing complex public policy debates which require a  
> discursive deliberative  process rather than the resolution of  
> technical problems.
>
> About the changes being proposed to paragraph 70. We think that it  
> is important to support the existing regional management  
> institutions where national interests are already very adequately  
> protected.
>
> Thank you Mr Chair.
>
>
> END
> _______________________________________________
> governance mailing list
> governance at lists.cpsr.org
> https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance
>

---------------------------------
James Love, CPTech / www.cptech.org / mailto:james.love at cptech.org /  
tel. +1.202.332.2670 / mobile +1.202.361.3040

_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance